Hello,
I'm running Spamassassin 3.0.4 with MailScanner on a redhat 3.0 AS
server.
When I run:
spamassassin -p /etc/MailScanner/spam.assassin.prefs.conf --lint
I get this error:
Failed to run DNS_FROM_AHBL_RHSBL RBL SpamAssassin test, skipping:
(Can't call method bgsend on an undefined
Hello Mun,
Tuesday, July 12, 2005, 3:36:10 AM, you wrote:
One possibility: If you're doing sa-learn as one user, and qmail is
invoking spamd to run as a different user, you may be training one
Bayes database and spamd may be using a different database that isn't
trained.
MF I'm having some
Oh fer ghod's sake don't do that! Patience is a virtue.
200 is a reasonably practical minimum for seeing decent results from the
Bayes filter. 1000 is about where it's nicely trained.
{O.O}
- Original Message -
From: Mun Fai [EMAIL PROTECTED]
If i change my config to the following:
Hello Mun,
Saturday, July 2, 2005, 2:59:44 PM, you wrote:
MF I'm using SpamAssassin 3.0.1 on a qmail system, and invoking it
MF using qmail-scanner.
MF 1. Send a test mail to my account, and explicitly run
MF sa-learn on the mail to identify it as spam. This is repeated for
MF abt 15 times
Mun Fai wrote on Sun, 3 Jul 2005 13:54:36 +0800:
bayes_min_ham_num 5
bayes_min_spam_num 5
Earlier versions of SA would ignore settings lower than 200, for good
reasons. Maybe that's changed. You'll see when you follow Bob's
instructions how to use the -D switch.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl,
In an older episode (Sunday 03 July 2005 11:31), Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Mun Fai wrote on Sun, 3 Jul 2005 13:54:36 +0800:
bayes_min_ham_num 5
bayes_min_spam_num 5
Earlier versions of SA would ignore settings lower than 200, for good
reasons. Maybe that's changed. You'll see when you
errors.
Now, how do I ensure that the Bayesian classifier is actually being invoked to
score new messages? I tried the following test:
1. Send a test mail to my account, and explicitly run sa-learn on the mail to
identify it as spam. This is repeated for abt 15 times.
2. Run sa-learn on all my
bayes_min_ham_num 200
bayes_min_spam_num 200
Bayes won't run until you have learned at least 200 each of spam and ham.
So you normally won't expect it to work for the first day or so after you
turn it on.
Once it is running, you should start seeing rule hits in your mails like
BAYES_00 (for ham)
Hi,
I get errors in make test in the t/bayesdbm_flock routine.
I try to get spamassassin 3.0.4 running under Solaris 9
(each of the earlier versions I got running without test errors)
Any help is highly appreciated!
Thanks in advance
Christine Kuhlmey
these are the errors:
t/bayesdbm_flock
Christine Kuhlmey wrote:
I get errors in make test in the t/bayesdbm_flock routine.
I try to get spamassassin 3.0.4 running under Solaris 9
(each of the earlier versions I got running without test errors)
Odd, you aren't by chance running on an NFS mounted directory are you?
Michael
On 21-Jun-2005 Michael Parker wrote:
Christine Kuhlmey wrote:
I get errors in make test in the t/bayesdbm_flock routine.
I try to get spamassassin 3.0.4 running under Solaris 9
(each of the earlier versions I got running without test errors)
Odd, you aren't by chance running on an NFS
Hi,
I figured it out. Quoting/escaping is your friend.
rawbody LOCAL_OBFUS_SPAN /SPAN style\=.*\DISPLAY: none\/i
score LOCAL_OBFUS_SPAN 0.5
Regards,
Nicki
At 08:32 AM 6/14/2005, Nicki de Wet wrote:
I have the following test in local.cf:
body LOCAL_OBFUS_SPAN /SPAN style\=3DDISPLAY: none/i
score LOCAL_OBFUS_SPAN 0.5
That's an HTML tag, you have to use rawbody, not body. body rules are run
after all HTML tags are removed from the message.
: Re: Test not matched
That's an HTML tag, you have to use rawbody, not body. body rules are run
after all HTML tags are removed from the message.
On Tue, Jun 14, 2005 at 02:32:11PM +0200, Nicki de Wet wrote:
body LOCAL_OBFUS_SPAN /SPAN style\=3DDISPLAY: none/i
The email below does not match this rule, although I don't know why. Does SA
stop executing tests after a certain point, or when certain tests are
positive?
Body rules are
: Marc Deslauriers [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification: spamassassin
-
Fedora Legacy Test Update Notification
FEDORALEGACY-2005-129284
Bugzilla https://bugzilla.redhat.com/bugzilla
a custom header in
the RCPT acl:
warn message = X-SA-Ret: $sender_address
in the DATA acl, SA can test that header instead of the Return-path:
Thanks,
Craig
I notice that the return-path: is often different from the from:
But my return-path: tests all fail. Here's one:
header RETPATH_NUMS_CJ Return-path =~ /[0-9]{6,}/
score RETPATH_NUMS_CJ 3.000
It will successfully match From:addr or Reply-To: but Return-path is
silent. Yes, I tried Return-Path,
On Sat, 4 Jun 2005, Craig Jackson wrote:
I notice that the return-path: is often different from the from:
But my return-path: tests all fail. Here's one:
header RETPATH_NUMS_CJ Return-path =~ /[0-9]{6,}/
score RETPATH_NUMS_CJ 3.000
It will successfully match From:addr or Reply-To: but
area. So I wrote a body test for checking links that don't have these
top level domains:
m{https?://[^/\s]+?(?!\.com)(?!\.net)(?!\.org)(?!\.gov)(?!\.us)(?!\.edu)(?!\.mil)(\/\[^\s])?}
This I copied from the Spamassassin test for odd ports. The logic is
similar. However I have never seen some
outside our geographic
area. So I wrote a body test for checking links that don't have these
top level domains:
m{https?://[^/\s]+?(?!\.com)(?!\.net)(?!\.org)(?!\.gov)(?!\.us)(?!\.edu)(?!\.mil)(\/\[^\s])?}
This I copied from the Spamassassin test for odd ports. The logic is
similar. However I
At 09:38 PM 5/30/2005, Craig Jackson wrote:
Craig Jackson wrote:
m{https?://[^/\s]+?(?!\.com)(?!\.net)(?!\.org)(?!\.gov)(?!\.us)(?!\.edu)(?!\.mil)(\/\[^\s])?}
This I copied from the Spamassassin test for odd ports. The logic is
similar. However I have never seen some of this notation
that I did not
Actually that is a negative lookBEHIND assertion that they are using.
Negative lookAHEAD is (?!, not (?!.
What this test is saying, in more or less english is: Match 'http', possibly
followed by 's', and then followed by '//:'. Then match everything up to a
/ or space, but don't
Hi,
On Wed, May 25, 2005 at 06:38:00PM -0700, Robert Menschel wrote:
Hello Mark,
Wednesday, May 25, 2005, 10:29:16 AM, you wrote:
...
MGT I had no troubles with SpamAssassin-3.0.2, but after following the same
MGT configure and build steps, I'm getting a test failure on 3.0.3, for a
MGT
I am pleased to report the problem is solved.
I obtained and installed the latest Berkeley DB from sleepycat.org,
then the perl module DB_File-1.811. This resolved the problem.
Please open a bug in BZ showing the symptoms and documenting the fix, and
give it a title of something like
following the same
MGT configure and build steps, I'm getting a test failure on 3.0.3, for a
MGT test that is fine in 3.0.2. I've repeated clean untar, configure, make,
MGT and make test for both versions, and still get this new failure on 3.0.3,
MGT but not 3.0.2. This is the only test that fails
I am running SA 3.02 on a Windows 2003 server.
As previously posted to this list I have had a problem where SA seems
unable to remove a bayes lock file or something like that.
First of all, I was wondering if anyone knows what the error message that
is being displayed and what might be
F:/DOCUME~1/ADMINI~1/SPAMAS~1/bayes_toks
debug: bayes: 2700 tie-ing to DB file R/O
F:/DOCUME~1/ADMINI~1/SPAMAS~1/bayes_seen
debug: bayes: found bayes db version 3
debug: Score set 3 chosen.
debug: dns_available set to yes in config file, skipping test
debug: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
At 11:06 AM Thursday, 5/19/2005, Jake Colman wrote -=
Does this work? My last two posts did not seem to make it to the list..
No... }B-)
Ed Kasky
~
Randomly Generated Quote (31 of 477):
Be gentle to all and stern with yourself.
- St. Teresa of Avila
I'm doing the upgrade to 3.03 through CPAN. I shut down
spamd for the install process. I dutifully fill in the
report address, then put in to skip network, Bayes, and
AWL tests during make test. I get a warning for an old
version of Razor2 (2.34, not 2.4) and then everything runs
fine
Hi
i am new into SPamAssassin and i want know if they have a tools for check
a personnal .cf files for see if he don't have a error.
Thanks for your help
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Phibee Network operation Center schrieb:
Hi
i am new into SPamAssassin and i want know if they have a tools for check
a personnal .cf files for see if he don't have a error.
Try spamassassin -D --lint. It will check all of your config
set to yes in config file, skipping test
debug: decoding: no encoding detected
debug: URIDNSBL: domains to query:
debug: is Net::DNS::Resolver available? yes
debug: Net::DNS version: 0.48
debug: all '*From' addrs: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
debug: Running tests for priority: 0
debug: running header regexp
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: rewrite_subject 1
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: report_header 1
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: use_terse_report 1
config: SpamAssassin failed to parse line, skipping: defang_mime 1
config:
Phibee Network operation Center wrote:
Thanks Christoph for your answer,
i have see a big quantity of error into my .cf file ;=) goods i have
resolved it ..
In the debug, i have a information that i don't understand :
I'm doing the upgrade to 3.03 through CPAN. I shut down spamd for the
install process. I dutifully fill in the report address, then put in to
skip network, Bayes, and AWL tests during make test. I get a warning
for an old version of Razor2 (2.34, not 2.4) and then everything runs
fine until
I don't seen any upgrade notes that would cause the following failures
with make test. I upgraded all the modules listed in the INSTALL
file to the latest versions. Any ideas? (Debian linux - perl 5.6.1)
t/dnsbl.Not found: P_2 =
dns:134.88.73.210.dnsbltest.spamassassin.org
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 01:32:29PM -0500, Josh Trutwin wrote:
I don't seen any upgrade notes that would cause the following failures
with make test. I upgraded all the modules listed in the INSTALL
file to the latest versions. Any ideas? (Debian linux - perl 5.6.1)
Do you have Net::DNS
On Fri, 29 Apr 2005 13:57:31 -0500
Michael Parker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Apr 29, 2005 at 01:32:29PM -0500, Josh Trutwin wrote:
I don't seen any upgrade notes that would cause the following
failures with make test. I upgraded all the modules listed in
the INSTALL file
From: Vicki Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I could give it a score of 0 but I'd like to simply say don't even test
against it.
That is precisely what I am told happens. If the score is zero the rule
is not run.
I'm getting tired of seeing ALL_TRUSTED. We run SMTP; they connect
directly
to us
Vicki Brown wrote:
I could give it a score of 0 but I'd like to simply say don't even test
against it.
I'm getting tired of seeing ALL_TRUSTED. We run SMTP; they connect directly
to us; there are no interim hosts.
You just want to do this for specific hosts, or period?
--
Eric A. Hall
On Sat, Mar 19, 2005 at 11:24:35AM -0800, Vicki Brown wrote:
I could give it a score of 0 but I'd like to simply say don't even test
against it.
I'm getting tired of seeing ALL_TRUSTED. We run SMTP; they connect directly
to us; there are no interim hosts.
I could edit the underlying rule
At 15:26 -0500 03/19/2005, Eric A. Hall wrote:
Vicki Brown wrote:
I could give it a score of 0 but I'd like to simply say don't even test
against it.
I'm getting tired of seeing ALL_TRUSTED. We run SMTP; they connect directly
to us; there are no interim hosts.
You just want to do
At 16:36 -0800 03/19/2005, jdow wrote:
I'm getting tired of seeing ALL_TRUSTED. We run SMTP; they connect
directly
to us; there are no interim hosts.
Fix the DNS. This rule is not nice to disable.
Nice for whom?
This rule is lying to me.
What do you mean by fix the DNS? There's nothing wrong
I could give it a score of 0 but I'd like to simply say don't even test
against it.
I'm getting tired of seeing ALL_TRUSTED. We run SMTP; they connect directly
to us; there are no interim hosts.
I could edit the underlying rule file but then I'd have to do that after any
update. is there an off
Hi,
I wonder how I have to train spamassassin to get bayes_XX test start
working.
I have a rule that trains the bayessian filter with each email y
received with the sa-learn tool. After some months of training (I
thought I needed 200 of spam and 200 of ham) I haven't seen it yet.
The last spam
I wonder how I have to train spamassassin to get bayes_XX test start
working.
I have a rule that trains the bayessian filter with each email y
received with the sa-learn tool.
You have not mentioned that rule and file in which you have written
that rule. if you can tell then it will help
Hi,
El Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:54:08 +0530
crisppy fernandes escribió:
You have not mentioned that rule and file in which you have written
that rule. if you can tell then it will help others to reply better.
anyway let me try to explain
I haven't written any rule by myself. I thought it should
Hi again,
El Fri, 18 Mar 2005 10:54:08 +0530
crisppy fernandes escribió:
Any rule you write or scores you change do not forget to run the
command spamassassin --lint
and for debugging you can add -D option.
AsteriX root # amavisd-new debug-sa
[..]
debug: bayes: 20621 tie-ing to DB file R/O
I had sent 3 messages to the spamassassin .
1. First test
score SUBJ_ILLEGAL_CHARS 0
# This is result
spam : 28468
norma : 1532
2. Second test
score SUBJ_ILLEGAL_CHARS 3.475
# This is result
spam : 28435
normal : 1565
Test result is more second test than spam of first test
I received
junoyang juno wrote:
I had sent 3 messages to the spamassassin .
1. First test
score SUBJ_ILLEGAL_CHARS 0
# This is result
spam : 28468
norma : 1532
2. Second test
score SUBJ_ILLEGAL_CHARS 3.475
# This is result
spam : 28435
normal : 1565
Test result is more second test than spam of first
Slightly off topic but does Sendmail 8.12 add a subject when one is not
present?
Matt Kettler wrote:
Russell P. Sutherland wrote:
Is there a test that one can construct that would
assign a weight to a message that is missing
a certain header, completely? In my case, no Subject
line at all
At 10:00 AM 3/15/2005, Mike Spamassassin wrote:
I have just received spam from Esmeralda Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a test which identifies that the description (Esmeralada
Bouchard) bears no resemblance to the given sender's address?
No.. It's quite common for normal people to have
...
Point taken, but I still think it would be a valid test.
Like all SpamAssassin tests it should only be one of many indicators.
In particular all the ones that I receive I would expect to have Mike or
Michael in the description of my email address.
I would also like to be able to pick out those
...
From: Loren Wilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
References: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Is there such a test?
Date: Tue, 15 Mar 2005 15:39:32 -0800
...
I have just received spam from Esmeralda Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a test which identifies
List Mail User wrote:
Unfortunately even the quotes, while typical, are optional; I have
lots of examples of both ham and spam without the quotes. The rule is that
everything from the ':' up to the '' is the description (and nearly anything
is legal). To show examples, here is an example from
to the original question:
Regardless of whether anyone thinks it is a good test or not, has anyone
yet created such a test?
Mike Spamassassin wrote:
Point taken, but I still think it would be a valid test.
Like all SpamAssassin tests it should only be one of many indicators.
No, not really. There's
or favorite sprts teams.
I think the person you're responding to was generous in
expecting the test might hit 80% spam and 20% ham. My bet is
that it would be closer to 50%, assuming you're able to come up
with a definition of address is related to name.
--
Keith C. Ivey [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Washington
Alright, I'm developing such a test.
For American/Anglo-Sexon names, it will do random comparason with the
Webster Dictionary for FLast, FirshL, First.Last Last.F, Last.First
and spell check them all.
For Indian names, it will search the Yahoo movie Database.
For French Names, we will append
in the hotmail world than in
the admin world. There's too much name collision for easy things like
mkettler to be available on hotmail.
Back to the original question:
Regardless of whether anyone thinks it is a good test or not, has anyone
yet created such a test?
I doubt it. It's not exactly
...
Date: Wed, 16 Mar 2005 09:38:13 - (GMT)
Subject: Re: Is there such a test?
From: Mike Spamassassin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I'd take that bet.
While you are almost certainly correct with the likes of those who
subscribe to this group, who often have multiple email addresses,
out there in [EMAIL
Is there a test that one can construct that would
assign a weight to a message that is missing
a certain header, completely? In my case, no Subject
line at all.
--
Quist ConsultingEmail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
219 Donlea DriveVoice: +1.416.696.7600
Toronto ON M4G 2N1
Russell P. Sutherland wrote:
Is there a test that one can construct that would
assign a weight to a message that is missing
a certain header, completely? In my case, no Subject
line at all.
From the default ruleset for 3.x:
header __HAS_SUBJECT exists:Subject
meta MISSING_SUBJECT
I have just received spam from Esmeralda Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a test which identifies that the description (Esmeralada
Bouchard) bears no resemblance to the given sender's address?
Similarly I sometimes receive spam mail to my email address but with a
completely unrecognisable
At 10:00 AM 3/15/2005, Mike Spamassassin wrote:
I have just received spam from Esmeralda Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a test which identifies that the description (Esmeralada
Bouchard) bears no resemblance to the given sender's address?
No.. It's quite common for normal people to have
Mike Spamassassin wrote on Tue, 15 Mar 2005 16:24:20 - (GMT):
Point taken, but I still think it would be a valid test.
Like all SpamAssassin tests it should only be one of many indicators.
In particular all the ones that I receive I would expect to have Mike or
Michael
I have just received spam from Esmeralda Bouchard [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is there a test which identifies that the description (Esmeralada
Bouchard) bears no resemblance to the given sender's address?
No. Because there is no possibly way of knowing that [EMAIL PROTECTED] really
isn't Johnny P
I would also like to be able to pick out those from Microsoft Support
which are not from microsoft.com and other typical phishing mails.
Now there you are on easier ground. SARE has several rules to catch phish
that are based on this sort of thing.
Loren
redirect those messages to me and I received them as no spam again! Am I
doing shit? What is wrong with my test?
Thanks for your attention.
bye
Citando Matt Kettler [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
At 11:57 PM 3/12/2005, you wrote:
So, I redirect those messages to me and I received them as no spam again!
Define exactly what you mean by redirect those messages. What specific
actions did you do?
I used redirect tool from webmail (horde)
wrote on Sun, 13 Mar 2005 01:57:18 -0300:
So, I redirect those messages to me and I received them as no spam again!
As I just wrote to GRP Productions: Bayes doesn't work this way.
Kai
--
Kai Schätzl, Berlin, Germany
Get your web at Conactive Internet Services: http://www.conactive.com
I am looking at the SA files and have not found any info about this yet.
Does SA 3.0.2 test for a reverse DNS (A record) on a connecting mail server
and assign a point value for servers with no reverse DNS?
Thanks
On 2/19/2005 5:31 PM, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Trying to install sa 3.0.2 I find that make test for 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 fails
on Suse 9.0 systems which got the recent security updates (Feb. 10 or so)
for Perl and Perl-DBI.
Anyone else experiences the same problem?
Yes, I had a fair number
Eric A. Hall wrote:
On 2/19/2005 5:31 PM, Kai Schaetzl wrote:
Trying to install sa 3.0.2 I find that make test for 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 fails
on Suse 9.0 systems which got the recent security updates (Feb. 10 or so)
for Perl and Perl-DBI.
Anyone else experiences the same problem?
Yes
Kai Schaetzl wrote on Sun, 20 Feb 2005 02:13:45 +0100:
Install the Storable module.
Thanks for the other private Mail, Bob. I compared
/usr/lib/perl5/5.8.1/i586-linux-thread-multi/auto/Storable/
with a new system where I applied the SuSE updates first and then used
CPAN to install any
Trying to install sa 3.0.2 I find that make test for 3.0.1 or 3.0.2 fails
on Suse 9.0 systems which got the recent security updates (Feb. 10 or so)
for Perl and Perl-DBI. The test isn't able to start spamd or connect to it
and can't find module Storable although it is installed and up-to-date
I use the body command to tests for phrases. This was working great, until a
spammer started to use double spacing in his email, and the phrases were split
up by empty lines. Is there any way around this? I've tried everything,
including using full and rawbody, but I still can't find a way to
It might or might not be impossible.
It *is* impossible on rawbody, since the rules only see one line at a time.
It might be impossible on full, if the message is encoded, since full will
see the encoded text.
It may or may not be impossible on body, depending on the version you are
running and a
newlines
into spaces.
Thanks for the info! Looks like I can get full to work.
These messages are simply plain text, nigerian type spam.
Maybe instead, what I should do, is create a test for double spacing in email.
:)
At 11:05 PM 1/30/2005, Mark London wrote:
I use the body command to tests for phrases. This was working great,
until a
spammer started to use double spacing in his email, and the phrases were split
up by empty lines. Is there any way around this?
The body command works on a copy of the message
Loren Wilton wrote:
Try the rule with /s on the end of the re. That will tend to turn newlines
into spaces.
People often seem to be confused by the /s modifier for regexes.
All it does is allow '.' to match any character. Without the
/s, '.' matches any character other than newline. So /s
On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 06:36, Matt Kettler wrote:
Perhaps you just need to modify your rule to tolerate more spaces, and
perhaps tabs, between words by using \s{1,10} instead of a space.
Maybe better yet:
(?:\s|\/?(?:P|BR))+
--
John Hardin
Development and Technology group (Seattle)
CRS
At 11:14 PM 1/30/2005, Loren Wilton wrote:
Try the rule with /s on the end of the re. That will tend to turn newlines
into spaces.
Loren, that should be redundant in any body or uri rule. SA already
does that conversion to the whole body to save doing it repeatedly for
every body rule in the
From: John Hardin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Mon, 2005-01-31 at 06:36, Matt Kettler wrote:
Perhaps you just need to modify your rule to tolerate more spaces, and
perhaps tabs, between words by using \s{1,10} instead of a space.
Maybe better yet:
(?:\s|\/?(?:P|BR))+
Geshundheidt,
At 12:26 PM 1/31/2005, jdow wrote:
(?:\s|\/?(?:P|BR))+
Geshundheidt, John.
Er, would you care to translate that sneeze, please.
I think he's trying to catch spaces or HTML line-end type tags.
Two problems
1) it will look for /P and /BR, but BR doesn't have a /BR.
2) body rules
At 01:04 PM 1/31/2005, John Hardin wrote:
That simplifies it greatly:
\s+
Yep, which goes back to being a lot like my earlier suggestion, \s{1,10} ,
it just lacks the upper bound of 10 I was using.
I generally don't like to use + or * unless I really want SA to be able to
bridge a very
At 10:40 AM 1/21/2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
According to:
http://spamassassin.apache.org/tests_3_0_x.html
The rule AWL should always hit 1, but I just found that it's hitting
5.1. I am not overriding it in local.cf, and there are no user-configs
allowed. The rule is not listed at all in
At 02:39 PM 12/27/2004, John Schneider wrote:
I'm having trouble install Storable on FreeBSD 4.9 so I can upgrade my SA to
3.0.2. Does anyone have any ideas how to solve the following error during
Make?
Looking at the Storable code, that bug only occurs if you try to build
Storable on Perl
Looking at the Storable code, that bug only occurs if you
try to build Storable on Perl 5.005_03.
If I do a perl -v I find that I'm using:
This is perl, v5.8.2 built for i386-freebsd
I wonder why CPAN is trying to use the wrong PERL. I know that PERL 5.005_03
ships with FreeBSD 4.9, but I've
I'm having trouble install Storable on FreeBSD 4.9 so I can upgrade my SA to
3.0.2. Does anyone have any ideas how to solve the following error during
Make?
Running test for module Storable
Running make for A/AM/AMS/Storable-2.13.tar.gz
Is already unwrapped into directory /root/.cpan/build
I got a flurry of these this morning, and they keep coming back. Has anyone
come up with some good rules for these? Obviously both test and keep in
the subject line. What else? The overall HTML structure looks pretty
consistent, so perhaps something that matches on that pattern? I'm seeing
Flurry of which? No attachment, at least here.
Loren
--On Monday, December 13, 2004 5:08 AM -0800 Loren Wilton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Flurry of which? No attachment, at least here.
Sorry, I see so many of these (5 a day or more) that I assume everyone's
been flooded by them.
Example attached.---BeginMessage---
On Monday 13 December 2004 16:58, Kenneth Porter might have typed:
--On Monday, December 13, 2004 5:08 AM -0800 Loren Wilton
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Flurry of which? No attachment, at least here.
Sorry, I see so many of these (5 a day or more) that I assume everyone's
been flooded by
--On Monday, December 13, 2004 5:10 PM + Duncan Hill
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Enable URIBLs and you should probably start catching it.
URIBL's were enabled. I checked my SA folder and found one on the 7th, so
I'm wondering if something broke in looking them up. That was the day I
rebooted
-Original Message-
From: Duncan Hill [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Monday, December 13, 2004 12:11 PM
To: users@spamassassin.apache.org
Subject: Re: Test and Keep spam
On Monday 13 December 2004 16:58, Kenneth Porter might have typed:
--On Monday, December 13, 2004 5:08 AM -0800
Good day!
My system:
Freebsd 4.10p5
I try make test SA 3.0.1_2 from FreeBSD port.
Installed perl module:
p5-ExtUtils-MakeMaker-6.24
p5-HTML-Parser-3.38
p5-HTML-Tagset-3.03
p5-IO-INET6-2.01
p5-IO-Socket-SSL-0.96
p5-MIME
Been getting a bunch of these lately, and they're falling on either side of
the 5.0 margin. Two that came in under 5.0 today have unusual
characteristics: The Bayes score on one is 60% and scores higher than one
with an 80% Bayes score. You can see my current uncaught corpus here:
corpus here:
http://home.sewingwitch.com:8000/Stuff/UncaughtSpam.mbox
Kenneth,
I've noticed with my corpus that BAYES_95 and BAYES_99 score less
than say BAYES_80 ... which has been a little discouraging for me since
most of the mail i'm filtering is japanese and other test don't hit
often so I
All,
I understand this may be the wrong place to ask a perl question, but I have
a question that Google nor any list I can find will answer... trying to
install perl module Net::Ident, I get make test errors as follows. I'd
really appreciate any tips. I've no idea why this is happening
901 - 1000 of 1032 matches
Mail list logo
